Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Easy

PT122 S1 Q3 Explanation

Xavier: Demand by tourists in

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

TopicsMethod

Keep going in LSAT Lab

  • Save & drill this skill build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Stimulus

Xavier: Demand by tourists in Nepal for inexpensive thangka paintings has resulted in the proliferation of inferior thangkas containing symbolic inaccuracies—a sure sign of a dying art form. Nepal should prohibit sales of thangkas to tourists, artists to create thangkas that meet traditional standards.

Yvette: An art form without dedicated young artists will decay and die. If tourists were forbidden to buy thangkas, young artists would cease making thangkas and form tourists can buy.

What this question is testing

Method

Your task

Describe how the argument proceeds — the technique it uses to reach its conclusion.

Common trap

Answers that describe a method the argument doesn't actually use.

Winning move

Track the role each statement plays, then match that to the choice describing the same moves.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question
3.

Yvette responds to Xavier

Answer choices

  1. Trap1% picked this

    denying the existence of the problem that Xavier’s proposal is designed

  2. Trap0% picked this

    challenging the integrity of Xavier’s sources

  3. Correct97% picked this

    arguing that Xavier’s proposal, if implemented, would result in the very consequences it is

    Why this is right

    Answer C is correct.

    Skill tested: Method · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

  4. Trap1% picked this

    using an analogy to draw a conclusion that is inconsistent with the conclusion

  5. Trap1% picked this

    showing that the evidence presented by Xavier has no bearing on the

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free